STAFF PAPER ON SYSTEMATIC CLASSIFICATION REVIEW AND ITS FUTURE

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP85B00552R001000070018-6
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 7
• Document Creation Date: December 20, 2016
• Document Release Date: November 30, 2007
• Sequence Number: 18
• Publication Date: April 8, 1982
• Content Type: MEMO

Approved For Release 2007/11/30: CIA-RDP85B00552RO01000070018-6 522
8 APR 1Z
MEMORANDUM FOR: Deputy Director for Administration
SUBJECT: Staff Paper on Systematic Classification
Review and Its Future
1. Statement of the Problem:
a. Executive Order (E.O.) 12065 has placed a burden upon the Agency in
the form of an inefficient systematic classification review program that is
of little value to the public. It has resulted in almost negligible document
declassification at a considerable expenditure of manpower aid money. This
led the Agency to join with others in the Intelligence Community to seek major
changes in the order. The new order that has been signed, E.O. 12356, allows
each agency to conduct an internal systematic classification review program
at its option. This raises two issues: (a) the extent and character of the
future internal systematic classification review program that should be estab-
lished in the Agency (if at all), and (b) the future mission and organization
of the Classification Review Division (CRD) which has been responsible for the
systematic classification review program under E.O. 12065. Recommendations
for approval are proposed in paragraph S.
b. Tab A is a brief history of systematic classification review in the
CIA. Tab B is a discussion of the activities that will require our continued
efforts regardless of the decision on an internal systematic classification
review program. Tab C provides a justification and rationale for structuring
a limited systematic classification review program.
2. Background:
a. Executive Order 12065 charges the Agency with the review of its
20-year-old classified material that is assessed to be of permanent value. It
was apparent early-on that the burden of this systematic classification review
program was intolerable and, with the change of administration, management sought
to join with other members of the Intelligence Community to have E.O. 12065
amended or replaced. Through this effort, a new order was drafted that proposed
that each agency conduct an internal systematic classification review program
at its option. That order, Executive Order 12356, has just been signed and
will be effective as of 1 August 1982.
Approved For Release 2007/11/30: CIA-RDP85B00552RO01000070018-6
 Approved For Release 2007/11/30: CIA-RDP85B00552R001000070018-6
b. Simultaneously with systematic classification review, we have been
reviewing the OSS classified records that have been categorized by theArchivist
of the United States as permanent. A determined effort by the task force of
independent contractors is underway to complete the review of these records by
the end of Fiscal Year 1982, which appears probable. Money has not been budgeted
for continuing the OSS review beyond that point. Also, in the latter part of
1978, additional security classification review responsibilities were assigned
to CRD, its resident expertise having been recognized. The Division assumed the
responsibility at that time for the Agency's review of documents proposed by the
Department of State for inclusion in its Foreign Relations of the United States
(FRUS) series. The Division reviewed and cleared a few volumes then remaining
in tne 1950 and 1951 series, went on to review and clear the volumes of the
1952-54 series, and has recently begun to work on the first several volumes of
the proposed 1955-57 collection. Further, by direction of the Director of
Information Services, who serves as the representative of the Directorate of
Administration on the Agency's Publications Review Board, CRD began reviewing
for that Directorate (with the exception of the Office of Security) the nonofficial
publications and oral presentations by employees and former employees. Finally,
the Division has taken on miscellaneous security classification reviews such as
the review of former-employee publications ex post facto to determine if the
authors have violated their agreements by revealing classified information;
proposed publications by former high-ranking government officials (e.g., former
Secretary of State Kissinger); documents in the possession of other agencies and
organizations which contain information concerning intelligence matters (e.g.,
records retired to the National Archives and Records Service (NARS) by the
Departments of State and Defense; Presidential papers held at the Presidential
Libraries); and proposed histories and other publications produced by other
agencies, their employees, or former employees (primarily the Department of
Defense (DoD)).
3. Discussion:
a. There is sound rationale for maintaining a systematic classification
review program in the Agency -- although not along the lines promulgated by
E.O. 12065 -- and for maintaining a centralized organization such as the
Classification Review Division to manage that program. The justification for
such a program is provided in Tab C. We need,. in any case, to provide for the
Agency the capability to undertake a variety of tasks involving security
classification review in liaison with other agencies. With systematic
classification review being optional under Executive Order 12356, the principal
agencies that have been involved in the program, namely, the Department of State,
the National Security Agency (NSA), the National Security Council (NSC), the
various elements of.DoD, and -- of course -- MARS, have all decided to continue
the program in some form. Essentially, the purpose is to identify information
of high interest that need no longer be withheld to protect national security
interests. Their rationale includes: (a) the contribution of such a program
to records management ("housecleaning" -- indeed, NSA believes that it will be
inundated in short order if it fails to continue the program); (b) the need to
release some information to the public in order to ease the burden in the
Approved For Release 2007/11/30: CIA-RDP85B00552R001000070018-6 .-.-,
 Approved For Release 2007/11/30: CIA-RDP85B00552RO01000070018-6
Freedom of Information Act, Privacy Act, and Mandatory Review programs; and
(c) the need to demonstrate a good faith effort in releasing information to
the public. The latter reason is most important from a good public relations
point of. view.
b. The impact of this rationale on the Agency is that the documents that
will be reviewed by other agencies contain much information that bears on our
equities. This information will surface as the entirety of an Agency-originated
document passed to them, as a portion of a document originated by that agency,
or as comment upon a matter of joint interest. Indeed the quantity of Agency
classified material located with our "customers" elsewhere in the Government is
staggering in certain instances (see Tab B). To assume that our equities will
be protected by shutting down our own systematic review program and. barring our
doors would be ostrich-like. To the contrary, the Agency must face the fact
that release of information of concern to us will continue regardless of our
position. We should, therefore, be positive in our efforts to control the flow
of that information in a liaison arrangement whereby the Agency is seen as being
cooperative, responsive, practical, and consistent.
c. In the press of classification review, one is constantly burdened with
the problem of monitoring the status of all documents in process, while being
faced with questions concerning the need to coordinate given documents with
another agency -- an unwelcome requirement which imposes additional control
problems and inevitable delay. In simple terms, if an agency imposes a difficult
coordinating process or is known to be unresponsive, one will choose not to co-
ordinate with that agency unless it is unavoidable. Considering the sensitivity
which the Agency places upon even the slightest reference to its activities --
the serious import of which is often not recognized by others -- we will place
our concerns in considerable jeopardy if we fail to posture ourselves to be
responsive to the needs of other agencies as they continue to pursue their
classification review programs.
d. An organization such as CRD, staffed with qualified reviewing officers,
can expedite inter-agency and intra-Agency classification review and thus ensure
the Agency's responsiveness. It can serve as the focal point for coordination
of external requests, and thus make coordination relatively, simple and practical.
More. importantly, CRD would be in the best position, in its focal-point role,
to ensure the consistency of release that is so vital in this kind of activity.
Already, several agencies, upon learning that CIA is considering the termination
of its systematic review program, have expressed the fervent hope that some unit
such as CRD will be maintained for the purpose of coordinating their continuing
programs. They see, as the alternative, confusion regarding coordination
procedures, probably reduced coordination, and total frustration in having to
submit essential requests via the less responsive and more cumbersome mandatory
review program.
e. Lacking a classification review unit, the Agency probably would have
to invent one. If for no other reason, the Agency needs to provide a capability
3
Approved For Release 2007/11/30: CIA-RDP85B00552RO01000070018-6
 Approved For Release 2007/11/30: CIA-RDP85B00552RO01000070018-6
in the Directorate of Administration for the review of unofficial publications
written by present and former employees. The publications volume to be reviewed
by each directorate has increased by about 40 percent in each of the last two
years and presently figures over 200 per year in the number of items and 20,000
in the number of pages. We believe, however, that there is a larger issue: that
the present, decentralized publications review process is not an efficient one.
We are therefore on record (DDA 81-1799/1, 18 November 1981) with a
recommendation that the effort be consolidated in CRD which would administer
the program, efficiently and expeditiously review the simpler drafts, review
and coordinate the more complex ones, and report its findings to the Publications
Review Board for concurrence. There is a compelling need for consistency in
this process, which consolidation of the review activity and the administration
(monitoring) of the program would realize, since it would be in the hands of a
qualified professional group with considerable experience in the business of
classification review. This would ensure the continued application of special
and current substantive expertise when necessary through internal coordination.
4. Summary:
a. The demand for efficiency, consistency, and a positive posture argue strongly
for the continuation of CRD with application of its expertise to the management
of a classification review program in its several forms -- internal systematic
review, consolidated publications review, and support to external review programs.
As the only component in the Agency with long-term, Agency-wide experience in
security classification review, CRD is in the best position to shoulder these
responsibilities. While o not roject a workload that would justify a 25X1
Division with the present ]one must bear in mind that a professionally
balanced cadre of reasonab e size must be maintained if the component'is to
have the proper mix of personnel. There must be sufficent experience, sense of
organizational history, and breadth of expertise to comprehend most of the Agency's
professional and technical functions in the context of the geographical areas
4
Approved For Release 2007/11/30: CIA-RDP85B00552RO01000070018-6
 Approved For Release 2007/11/30: CIA-RDP85B00552RO01000070018-6
b. Should the decision be made to consolidate publication review in the
DDA/OIS, as. has already been proposed, CRD would need an additional five positions.
These positions would allow for three additional intelligence officers at the
GS-13 level for classification review, one additional intelligence assistant and
one additional clerk-typist/data transcriber.
5. Recommendations:
a. The Agency continue with a systematic classification review program,
as outlined in Tab C, that is tailored to review only those permanent records
that would be of interest to the general public and could be released within
a reasonable period without damage to national security, and that the
Classification Review Division be authorized four Dositions to conduct this
program,
I S APPROVED :
b. The Classification Review Division be authorized five additional
positions, a total of 23, when and if publication review is consolidated
in DDA/OIS.
eputy e or or ini ,*nitration
Attachments:
As stated
-/?L' 4, e-, e -. - -
Approved For Release 2007/11/30: CIA-RDP85B00552RO01000070018-6
 Approved For Release 2007/11/30: CIA-RDP85B00552RO01000070018-6
Attachments:
1. Tab A - Brief History of Systematic
Classification Review in CIA
2. Tab B - Activities which Require a
Classification Review Function in
Liaison with other Government Agencies
3. Toward a Limited Customized Systematic
Review Program
6
Approved For Release 2007/11/30: CIA-RDP85B00552RO01000070018-6 -,-
 Approved For Release 2007/11/30: CIA-RDP85B00552RO01000070018-6
Approved For Release 2007/11/30: CIA-RDP85B00552RO01000070018-6